Trees Bring Rain #2
California needs MORE trees, not less.
If California really DID need “forest management,” I’d love to see the timber companies start with Beverly Hills and Bel Air.
I’m accessing our Sun Sync Nutrition website files as a PUBLIC SERVICE.
The following Sun Sync blog entry is from May 7, 2015.
The “scientific” BS is piling up so fast, you need wings to stay above it.
Half-baked hydrologists are actually blaming trees for California’s drought.
Mark Koba (“Trees vs. humans: In California drought, nature gets to water first,” CNBC, Oct. 17, 2014) wrote …
“What’s good for the trees may be bad for people. That’s because the trees are soaking up a lot more water that would normally be filling up many of the state’s reservoirs, which are at very low levels because of three years of severe drought.
“‘More trees means more water stays in the forest,’ said Roger Bales, a hydrologist at the University of Southern California at Merced, who was co-author of the report on increased mountain vegetation from the effects of climate change.
“‘It’s the same idea like planting more plants in your garden,’ he said. ‘The more plants you have, the more water you need for them.'”
Logical? Yes No Maybe! Here’s the other side of the story, written 109 revolutions [112 as of today] around the Sun ago.
According to “Forests and Rivers,” Bulletin of the Department of Agriculture, Aug. 1906 …
“The physical conditions of forest land are that, owing to the shelter from sun and wind, the atmosphere is generally colder and damper than in the open country, and evaporation consequently less. It is calculated that a hectare of forest land (2 ½ acres) gives off every day 37 cubic metres of oxygen and 37 metres of carbonic acid, leading to a great expenditure of heat; and that from every hectare of forest land sufficient heat is abstracted to melt 316 cubic metres of ice. Ligneous plants also withdraw from the ground and discharge as vapour more than 40,000 gallons of water per hectare per day, which causes a sensible reduction of temperature. When clouds pass over a forest they encounter a cool, damp atmosphere, the point of saturation comes closer, and rain is caused. This condition of forest land has been remarked on by aeronauts, who find that a balloon is invariably affected, and drops when passing over forests.
“The advantages claimed for forests with regard to water supply are that the trees act as regulators of the rainfall; that the average quantity of rain falling on land covered with forests is greater than in the open ground to the extent of about one-sixth; that it holds up the water for a time and discharges it later on when water is most required in river basins, the rain being held back by the leaves of the trees and coming to the ground more gradually; the rain that falls on the surface is also taken up by the layer of dead leaves on the ground, which permits of a gradual percolation to the sub-soil. Observations show that in summer the ground of the forest is damper than that of the adjacent cleared land, and snow remains for a much longer period in forest land before melting than in cleared land.
“On the other hand, it has been contended by some of those who have made a study of sylviculture that forests do not increase the quantity of water flowing to the springs and rivers, but reduce it. The numerous striking facts quoted do not bear out this contention, which is mainly based on the fact that the substratum water stands at a lower level on forest land than in the adjacent cleared ground. This fact is generally admitted to be the case at one period of the year. As the result of many years observations, it has been found that the maximum level of underground water is reached in May, that the water accumulates in the ground from August to January; and that the rivers are supplied by this reserve, and were it not for this accumulation many brooks and river feeders would cease to flow in summer.”
(To Be Continued)